Homosexuality - Here I stand.

[Hentenza]

There are only four passages where the Bible specifically teaches about a practice which has often been generalized to mean all same-sex physical affection.

Unfortunately by attempting to explain away the obvious reading of he passages that you cited the main message throughout the bible is distorted. The bible fact is that God created only one man and one woman and that is how He defined marriage. Every verse in the bible talking about marriage only talks about marriage between a man and a woman. The message is inescapable.

 

[Ave Maria]

The truth about homosexuality:

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

141 Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.
142 CDF, Persona humana 8.

2396 Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...faith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

The last two links are given simply for additional information.

 

[Brennin]

That appears an accurate description of the gay-baiters claiming to worship of a "god of love" who prohibits certain lovers from expressing same merely on a whim. Such a god is no god at all and does not exist except in the imaginations of the reality-impaired. Nothing is more "mutually exclusive" than a "god of love" who encourages the hatreds of the antigay faction.

I would say the same about your saccharine, "anything goes" god. The difference is that I have right reason and scripture on my side.

 

[ReformedChapin]

That's a highly selective literal interpretation and not an accurate one according to some interpretations. What appears in Leviticus and is implied in a handful of vague Pauline passages reflect the culture and little more.

You can manipulate the plain meaning of the passage all the time but you have to refute 2000 years of the same interpration you liberals have nothing to overcome that.

That would be a mistake on their part. No God demands such. Such demands are merely oppression of a minority and based only on a desire to continue said oppression. The scriptures have been used many times to harm others and this is no exception.

I don't know which god you're talking about but this isn't the biblical God of the Historic Christian Faith.

 

[wayseer]

The bible fact is that God created only one man and one woman and that is how He defined marriage. Every verse in the bible talking about marriage only talks about marriage between a man and a woman. The message is inescapable.

I am not talking about marriage - that's another subject.

 

[wayseer]

The difference is that I have right reason and scripture on my side.

Whether you have right and scripture on your side is a matter of debate. Which particular piece of scripture did you have in mind to lend support to your belief?

 

[wayseer]

You can manipulate the plain meaning of the passage all the time but you have to refute 2000 years of the same interpration you liberals have nothing to overcome that.

Perhaps you have not been reading the thread. I have yet to read of any passage in the Bible that declares homosexuality a sin apart from the one's I have acknowledged.

I don't know which god you're talking about but this isn't the biblical God of the Historic Christian Faith.

Those taking part are talking about scripture, not your concept of God. Do you have something to add to the discussion?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Perhaps you have not been reading the thread. I have yet to read of any passage in the Bible that declares homosexuality a sin apart from the one's I have acknowledged.

I wasn't addressing you? I was addressing TexasLynn who doesn't seem to acknowledge any passage that directly declares homosexuality a sin.

Those taking part are talking about scripture, not your concept of God. Do you have something to add to the discussion?

Again not addressing you, why are you pointing your finger at me and not her?

 

[Texas Lynn]

The bible fact is that God created only one man and one woman

We don't know that. As Drummond said to Brady in Inherit the Wind maybe somebody else pulled off another creation in the next county.

...and that is how He defined marriage.

Sorry, no. Marriage as an institution only became a reality with the dawn of culture in tribal life. Besides, where was the county clerk with whom the mythical Adam and Eve could have registered as a married couple, and with what did they pay the fee?

Every verse in the bible talking about marriage only talks about marriage between a man and a woman.

More correctly, between a man and one or more women.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I would say the same about your saccharine, "anything goes" god. The difference is that I have right reason and scripture on my side.

LOL! In your opinion...

 

[wayseer]

The truth about homosexuality:

PD - I'm not that interested in what others tell me about homosexuality - I'm interested in scripture.

The text of Gen 19:1-29 remains inclusive that it was 'homosexuality' that aroused God's anger. As I have illustrated, it is more likely that what God was upset about the worship of the human body - the very thing railed against by Paul in his letters to the Romans.

1 Cor 6:10 confirms that it was the form of worship that was problematic. And those problems extended beyond one type of behaviour. Paul mentions drunkenness, amongst others yet there is nowhere near any passion developed concerning any of these other matters.

1 Tim 1:10 does not specifically mention homosexuality. And Paul did was not the author of the Timothy or Titus letters - they were written well after his death.

I have acknowledge, it is a fine line I tread. However, given the expansive teaching of Jesus that we are to 'love', I find that I am unable to accept that people living in loving, caring and compassionate relationships as somehow sinful.

Further - despite what the Vatican may say on the matter, science has now accepted that sexual orientation is genetically based, which means it is out of the control of the individual. If the Vatican is to condemn homosexuality it may, likewise, condemn depression, schizophrenia, et al, which are also genetic attributes, as acts of grave depravity. I think society has fortunately progressed beyond that point.

 

[Texas Lynn]

You can manipulate the plain meaning of the passage all the time but you have to refute 2000 years of the same interpration you liberals have nothing to overcome that.

That's the meme but it's incorrect. Since the word "homosexuality" didn't exist 2000 years ago all you have to support your position is wishful thinking. Knowledge always increases. They believed the world was flat too way back then, or maybe being carried on the back of a giant turtle. That sort of primitive mythmaking is all you have to support your position.

 

[wayseer]

I wasn't addressing you? I was addressing TexasLynn who doesn't seem to acknowledge any passage that directly declares homosexuality a sin.

... and neither do I.

Again not addressing you, why are you pointing your finger at me and not her?

Sorry if you think I am pointing any fingers - that's not my intent. I'm interested in the debate and I make the assumption that as you are engaged with this thread that you are part of that debate.

 

[wayseer]

As Drummond said to Brady in Inherit the Wind maybe somebody else pulled off another creation in the next county.

TL - this thread is not about marriage. Please start you own thread if that is your interest otherwise your posts are unhelpful.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I was addressing TexasLynn who doesn't seem to acknowledge any passage that directly declares homosexuality a sin.

Certainly no more so than having a shrimp cocktail.

 

[OllieFranz]

Unfortunately by attempting to explain away the obvious reading of he passages that you cited the main message throughout the bible is distorted. The bible fact is that God created only one man and one woman and that is how He defined marriage. Every verse in the bible talking about marriage only talks about marriage between a man and a woman. The message is inescapable.

Lets look at those two passages (Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24) in light of Leviticus 18:22.

As I said in an earlier post in this thread, Leviticus does not use a paired set of words for the man and the woman; instead, it uses the word from one pair (zakar) for the man, and the word from another (ishshah) for the woman. Let's look at these two verses and see what words they use:

So God created man (adam) in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male (zakar) and female (neqebah) created he them.
Genesis 1:27

Therefore shall a man (ish) leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife (ishshah): and they shall be one flesh.
Genesis 2:24

​

Genesis 1:27 uses "adam" and then the pair "zakar" and "neqebah." Genesis 2:24 uses the pair "ish" and "ishshah."

"Adam" means man generically, often without regard to sex. The first part of the verse says that god created "adam" mankind. The second part mentions that mankind ("adam) comes in two varieties, man and woman, male and female. This is simply descriptive, and not proscriptive. Just as in verse 1:24, God created beasts: both cattle and "creeping things." Exact same construction. In this case it clearly just descriptive. Unless you want to say that the breeding of milk cows is wrong, since they should only be cross-bred with snakes.

"Ish" and "ishshah," husband and wife speaks of the marriage bond. The verse says that it is stronger even than the bond between child and parents. That is why when (in Matthew 19) Jesus quoted this verse -- in the context of a discussion on divorce -- He added "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." There is nothing in this verse or in Jesus' use of it that forbids a marriage bond from forming between two men or two women, other than that it is not typical in most cultures.

The use of the split pair "zakar" and "ishshah" in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 suggests (but does not demand) the problem with "man-lying" is adultery: giving to another (a stranger or relative stranger) that which rightfully belongs to the spouse. If it relates at all to Jesus' teaching in Matthew 19, it is a sin because it betrays the marriage bond he has with his spouse. On the other hand, if the other man is his spouse, there is no betrayal.

 

[Jase]

The truth about homosexuality:





http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...faith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

The Catechism is hardly the definitive word on worldly truth, and why should us non-Catholics give a darn about what the Catholic Church says? It is a corrupt insitutition with insane amounts of money, who lets such disgusting acts as pedophilia go under the radar. Th Catholic Church is the last institution i'd ever listen to.

 

[ReformedChapin]

... and neither do I.



Sorry if you think I am pointing any fingers - that's not my intent. I'm interested in the debate and I make the assumption that as you are engaged with this thread that you are part of that debate.

You keep going back and forth on this. Do you or don't you think that any passage at all asserts that homosexuality is a sin?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Certainly no more so than having a shrimp cocktail.

Yes heretics have made the bible say different things for 2000 years, I know.

 

[HuntingMan]

Certainly no more so than having a shrimp cocktail.

Sorry but Christ declared ALL foods clean when He said nothing we take into our body defiles it.
In Acts 15 those parts of the law that the gentiles were to follow were given...one of which includes fornication/illicit sex....NONE of which include not eating shellfish.
The lengths to which some go to justify what God has shown to be sin VERY clearly in His word is quite astounding.

Gentiles and the Mosaic Law - Acts 15
New Testament "fornication" defined by Mosaic Law -Acts 15
Homosexuality